Control all units?

Hi,

 

In the Editor, will it be possible to decide which ground unit can be controled and which not?

Or can the CA player control every unit in his coallition?

Command Roles

A new function that Combined Arms introduces is the ability to set ground command roles and the

number of players that can take each role (for multiplayer). Roles include:

• Ground Commanders that control all types of friendly ground forces.

• JTACs that provide unique features to designate ground targets for close air support.

• Game Masters that see and control all units from both sides.

• Observers that can view all of the action, but not direct any units.

 

from here: forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=89468

 

Could be a problem in Mission design I guess. You allow Game Masters, ground commanders, you can spoil AI units.

Observers may cheat/spy for opposite faction...

 

Still no precise info if the JTAC Human/client slot can be defined for each JTAC unit individually ( what I would prefer) or if a player JTAC may hop into every JTAC unit on the field, according to his side?

http://memegenerator.net/instance/21410478?browsingOrder=New&browsingTimeSpan=Today

 

It seemed appropriate.

It would nice in the ME if we could set units to be dedicated AI only and not available to be manned. I also wonder how players who man a lead vehicle in a group of ground units are supposed to know exactly what their task (as set by the miz builder) is unless of course they are in TS with the battle commander.

 

All I know is that for CA missions, the miz briefs are going to have to be a lot more detailed !

@ Druid: that is exactly my fear. If it is not possible to decide what unit can be controlled and what unit can'T be controlled, I think I will not add this function to my missions.

Else it will be a perfect caos!

I think we'll have to wait and see what CA brings. Another option would be to have briefings for group leaders or at the very least allow them to see the waypoints and instructions (e.g ROI, FIRE AT POINT etc) that were set by the miz builder. If they decide not to follow those instructions due to situation or battle commanders instructions then that's fine by me. It's adds the human element which current AI can't mimic.

 

I'm sure over time these things will be worked out. Some things will work and some won't, changes will be made and we'll mostly all be happy.

man I can remember my days in the commanders briefing with all the platoon leader just before jump off. :thumbup:

A new function that Combined Arms introduces is the ability to set ground command roles and the number of players that can take each role (for multiplayer). Roles include:

 

• Ground Commanders that control all types of friendly ground forces.

• JTACs that provide unique features to designate ground targets for close air support.

• Game Masters that see and control all units from both sides.

• Observers that can view all of the action, but not direct any units.

 

The language here suggests the following:

 

1. Ground Commander role and JTAC role are different, so it should be safe to have player-controlled JTAC at the very least.

 

2. The Ground Commander role you're concerned about can be limited to a number of players, but not to specific players. There can probably be many ground commanders.

 

3. "The ability to set ground command roles" could mean, albeit with less certainty, that the Ground Commander roles can be set to have command over specific forces, rather than all ground commanders sharing absolute control over all forces.

 

Worst case scenario: write your mission with no ground commanders allowed, just some JTAC player slots.

 

Seems very unlikely: the ability to lock roles to particular players by ID or password. You can't lock aircraft slots that way, after all.

 

You probably won't want to have public server missions with ground commander slots where those slots have control over a large number of troops or control over mission-critical troops. Instead I would plan, at least for now, to give ground commanders control over platoon-sized forces or smaller. It seems a good idea to make sure those troops are supplementary to the action, rather than integral to it, if you're planning for an open game where players can come and go.

Another snippet I missed that suggests you'll get what you want as a mission creator:

 

Both cooperative and head-to-head missions can be played with at least 32 players occupying various ground command and aircraft command roles.

This is to still be determined. There is no answer yet.

 

Please wags, let add a checkbox "Controllable by Combined Arms" to every Ground Unit.

Or a "Skill Dropdown" like for the aircrafts.

 

This is very important for the missions, else it will be a perfect caos.

When I check the checkbox "hide on map" in the editor, will the CA client even be able to see this unit on his F10 map and control it?

Please wags, let add a checkbox "Controllable by Combined Arms" to every Ground Unit.

Or a "Skill Dropdown" like for the aircrafts.

 

This is very important for the missions, else it will be a perfect caos.

+1

When I check the checkbox "hide on map" in the editor, will the CA client even be able to see this unit on his F10 map and control it?

For all units on his side he should be able to. However for enemy units I believe that initially he will not. Once a friendly unit observes an enemy unit and it is reported (by some means yet to be determined) then that enemy unit will appear in the F10 map. I believe this is what is called 'fog of war'.

Please wags, let add a checkbox "Controllable by Combined Arms" to every Ground Unit.

Or a "Skill Dropdown" like for the aircrafts.

 

This is very important for the missions, else it will be a perfect caos.

 

+2

For all units on his side he should be able to. However for enemy units I believe that initially he will not. Once a friendly unit observes an enemy unit and it is reported (by some means yet to be determined) then that enemy unit will appear in the F10 map. I believe this is what is called 'fog of war'.

 

You can already see this in action in DCS:-World

 

Nate

The language here suggests the following:

A new function that Combined Arms introduces is the ability to set ground command roles and the number of players that can take each role (for multiplayer). Roles include:

 

• Ground Commanders that control all types of friendly ground forces.

• JTACs that provide unique features to designate ground targets for close air support.

• Game Masters that see and control all units from both sides.

• Observers that can view all of the action, but not direct any units.

1. Ground Commander role and JTAC role are different, so it should be safe to have player-controlled JTAC at the very least.

 

2. The Ground Commander role you're concerned about can be limited to a number of players, but not to specific players. There can probably be many ground commanders.

 

3. "The ability to set ground command roles" could mean, albeit with less certainty, that the Ground Commander roles can be set to have command over specific forces, rather than all ground commanders sharing absolute control over all forces.

 

Worst case scenario: write your mission with no ground commanders allowed, just some JTAC player slots.

 

Seems very unlikely: the ability to lock roles to particular players by ID or password. You can't lock aircraft slots that way, after all.

 

You probably won't want to have public server missions with ground commander slots where those slots have control over a large number of troops or control over mission-critical troops. Instead I would plan, at least for now, to give ground commanders control over platoon-sized forces or smaller. It seems a good idea to make sure those troops are supplementary to the action, rather than integral to it, if you're planning for an open game where players can come and go.

The highlighted line is of concern with people able to observe all sides that opens up a can of worms for unsportsman like conduct. A "Gods Eye" on the battlefield can eliminate that fog of war and uncertainty of enemy positions. Useful in the mission editor part, but not for gameplay please.

.. there has always been spectators..

you can't account for the wrongdoing of everyone...ED give the tools, it is up to us to use them ... removing features for fear of miss-use is a slippery slope..

The highlighted line is of concern with people able to observe all sides that opens up a can of worms for unsportsman like conduct. A "Gods Eye" on the battlefield can eliminate that fog of war and uncertainty of enemy positions. Useful in the mission editor part, but not for gameplay please.

 

Observers are different from spectators and they must be placed in a mission in order to exist, as you can see in this post by Wags: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1474102&postcount=4